Kiss and Cry drama is dead (article)

[gkelly]

I don't mind someone saying

"I don't like COP (or didn't like 6.0) because . . ."
or
"Many fans don't like COP (or didn't like 6.0) because . . ."

I can't argue with what you like or don't like. I would have to agree that both points of view, as well as many in between, can be attributed to many fans.

What I don't like is statements such as
"Fans/audiences don't like COP because . . ."

Audiences and groups of fans are not monolithic groups with single opinions. Celebrate diversity!

 

[Joesitz (RIP)]

I don't mind someone saying

"I don't like COP (or didn't like 6.0) because . . ."
or
"Many fans don't like COP (or didn't like 6.0) because . . ."

I can't argue with what you like or don't like. I would have to agree that both points of view, as well as many in between, can be attributed to many fans.

What I don't like is statements such as
"Fans/audiences don't like COP because . . ."

Audiences and groups of fans are not monolithic groups with single opinions. Celebrate diversity!

and they are not soley based in the United States, but the american interest is down. Can't ignore that.

 

[gsrossano]

First, George would like to thank momjudi for posting the link and not the whole article like they do on another board (that apparently does not respect copyrights).

For me, I have long felt the time between skaters is excessive, and IMO is the main problem. I also miss seeing after the skaters perform how much the judges agree with each other. Now it is only long after a competition that I can figure that out from the protocols.

 

[museksk8r]

What I don't like is statements such as
"Fans/audiences don't like COP because . . ."

Audiences and groups of fans are not monolithic groups with single opinions. Celebrate diversity!

Thank you!

I still contend that figure skating lost the majority of its audience because of faulty judges, not a faulty judging system. Code of Points didn't bring corruption to the sport; cheating judges and certain federation leaders did. The '98 Olympic ice dance competition and the '02 Olympic pairs competition, both judged under the 6.0 system, will tell you that. 6.0 and COP both had/have their flaws and controversy exists under both judging systems.

 

[Joesitz (RIP)]

Thank you!

I still contend that figure skating lost the majority of its audience because of faulty judges, not a faulty judging system. Code of Points didn't bring corruption to the sport; cheating judges and certain federation leaders did. The '98 Olympic ice dance competition and the '02 Olympic pairs competition, both judged under the 6.0 system, will tell you that. 6.0 and COP both had/have their flaws and controversy exists under both judging systems.

How much corruption can a fan of any Sport take? before he/she loses interest?
It's not just pointing the finger. It's making figure skating as honest as Pro Wrestling.

 

[Joesitz (RIP)]

History of Kiss and Cry - If you are interest

It was Finland that started the ball rolling.

http://figureskating.about.com/b/20...ss-and-cry-figure-skating-area-come-about.htm

 

[icedancedevotee]

Coming from a totally different angle, I think your friend/acquaintance did a lovely job presenting her views, momjudi. It was a nicely written article. Whether we like the new judging system or hate it, there's no going back to the 6.0 system, and that's that. I agree that the drama has been lost, and we'll just have to see what happens from here. Perhaps just as the "older" skaters who came up under 6.0 have had difficulty adjusting to COP, so too have we "older" fans. Once COP has been around for a decade or so, maybe we'll find a whole new kind of drama to be excited about! At least I hope so.

 

[waxel]

I understand CoP and what a score means but some competitions/broadcasts have done a better job of posting the results than others.

For me K&C neither enhances nor undermines a skater's performance. But it is tradition and I think it should be left alone.

 

[Jaana]

I think that there is lots of interesting Kiss & Cry drama going on under CoP system, too. Skaters are exactly as much interested in their own scores as they were earlier in 6,0 system. Earlier they saw their success according to the placements, now they are seeing their PB and what they now achieve in that particular competition and also hear (or see from the monitor) their current placement.

Personally I really like Cop, because basically a skater gets what she/he has done on the ice and those flip flopping placements are not any more there fortunately. Of course the system still needs tweaking, especially PCS. On the other hand also the presentation in 6,0 system favoured = was holding up skaters with a reputation very much.

During the CoP years I have really enjoyed of lots and lots of great programmes, because of the more demanding choreography. Just thinking of the wonderful programmes from e.g. Jeffrey Buttle, Yu-Na Kim, Evan Lysacek, Laura Lepisto, Daisuke Takahashi, etc.....

 

[Joesitz (RIP)]

The joys in the K&C are wonderful, but nobody wants to mention the many sadnesses in the K&C, and right in front of the world wide audience. So unnecessary

 

[Mathman]

It was Finland that started the ball rolling.

http://figureskating.about.com/b/20...ss-and-cry-figure-skating-area-come-about.htm

Thanks for the history!

The joys in the K&C are wonderful, but nobody wants to mention the many sadnesses in the K&C, and right in front of the world wide audience. So unnecessary.

I wonder how they handled it way back in the day, when skating contests were outdoors and the judges shivered at a table at rinkside holding up placards. Did the skaters have to stand at attention before the judges like prisoners at the bar to receive their marks?

 

[marc2000]

Still not a huge fan of the CoP here. I see some merits, but i agree that it does take some of the drama and excitement out of the results. I do miss the 6.0. I often wondered if it would be possible to score skating like the old style gymnastics scoring:

The techincal specialists evaluate all the elements in a long program and say this program will be based out of a 6.0 or a 5.8 and then the judges using their + or - grades of execution will average out a score. So, we could keep the premis of CoP and still keep the best part of the 6.0 system.

Basically each season, the ISU would decide the point ranges of planned elements that constitute a 6.0 routine, a 5.9 rountine and so on downward. The techincal specialists would watch a program and still call levels and elements and then determine the "Degree of difficulty" of the program. The judges would still grade cleanliness of execution etc. and we could arrive at a final score on the technical side that would still feel like the old system.

As for the artistic mark, if judges marked out of a 6.0 instead of a 10.0 and all marks were maybe averaged, it could work.

The other benefit of creating an overall "degree of difficulty" in a program is that it may encourage slightly more diverse programs. If skaters could clearly see that there was more than one path to a 5.9 program, we might see more variety.

 

[gkelly]

About 10 years ago, before there were any public proposals from the ISU for what became the current scoring system, I played around with inventing a couple of alternatives to the system then in use.

One version was quite similar to the IJS we have now in terms of scoring each element separately, although it didn't use a separate technical panel or give "levels" for elements depending on how many features they had -- it just gave base marks for the kind of element and bonus points for features that added difficulty, as well as for higher quality.

Another version was basically what marc2000 suggests. I wrote of lists of requirements for a skater to start with a long program base mark of 6.0 or 4.5 for jumps and 6.0 or 4.5 for spins, deductions for errors or omissions, and options for bonus points for the 4.5 base mark.

(Since 6.0 was the maximum, there were no bonus points available. If a program qualified to earn that mark for a given category it would earn 6.0 and nothing more that the skater did would earn them any more points in that category.)

I hadn't gotten as far as describing how to score the presentation or technical content other than jumps and spins.

I also hadn't come up with rules for how 3 or more scores from each judge would be combined to determine final results.

Anyone interested in reading what I wrote and saved from 1998 and filling in the gaps in how it would work? or analyzing why it would or would not be an improvement on either ordinals or the IJS we have now?

 

[Kinga]

About 10 years ago, before there were any public proposals from the ISU for what became the current scoring system, I played around with inventing a couple of alternatives to the system then in use.

One version was quite similar to the IJS we have now in terms of scoring each element separately, although it didn't use a separate technical panel or give "levels" for elements depending on how many features they had -- it just gave base marks for the kind of element and bonus points for features that added difficulty, as well as for higher quality.

Another version was basically what marc2000 suggests. I wrote of lists of requirements for a skater to start with a long program base mark of 6.0 or 4.5 for jumps and 6.0 or 4.5 for spins, deductions for errors or omissions, and options for bonus points for the 4.5 base mark.

(Since 6.0 was the maximum, there were no bonus points available. If a program qualified to earn that mark for a given category it would earn 6.0 and nothing more that the skater did would earn them any more points in that category.)

I hadn't gotten as far as describing how to score the presentation or technical content other than jumps and spins.

I also hadn't come up with rules for how 3 or more scores from each judge would be combined to determine final results.

Anyone interested in reading what I wrote and saved from 1998 and filling in the gaps in how it would work? or analyzing why it would or would not be an improvement on either ordinals or the IJS we have now?

Indeed, this sounds interesting and also would be quite simple to understand for a casual fan.
I really enjoy the discussion we have here how to improve the scoring system. Almost everyone comes up with interesting ideas, which, if only logically linked together, could address at least some issues in scoring. However, the sad thing is that we/journalists/skaters/coaches could have tons and tons of good suggestions, and ISU won't listen any way...

 

[Joesitz (RIP)]

Thanks for the history!

I wonder how they handled it way back in the day, when skating contests were outdoors and the judges shivered at a table at rinkside holding up placards. Did the skaters have to stand at attention before the judges like prisoners at the bar to receive their marks?

No, they just cried to their mothers in the crowd. It did make some newspaper reporting with nothing about the losers. There usually was a newsreel account about the winner. Dick Button's wins made the newsreels, and so we get a sampling of his prowess at that time. Not until the K&C came into being were we relishing the despair of the losers. It was like ancient Rome with thumbs down and then confirmed with the scores appearing on the Board.
sad?

 

[Joesitz (RIP)]

Indeed, this sounds interesting and also would be quite simple to understand for a casual fan.
I really enjoy the discussion we have here how to improve the scoring system. Almost everyone comes up with interesting ideas, which, if only logically linked together, could address at least some issues in scoring. However, the sad thing is that we/journalists/skaters/coaches could have tons and tons of good suggestions, and ISU won't listen any way...

I don't think there is an immediate response to good suggestions but they do go on in in the back of some minds and reappear at a more opportune time.

I would suggest that the results of the total scores of each individual contestant be shown in Ordinals as it was in 6.0 system. I say this because of a previous discussion on the Board spoke of the results of a contest in ordinals are similar to the results of CoP. For the fear of exposing judges' names, that too, could be maintained as secret. (Why, I'll never understand. It seems to me if a judge can not stand by his/her convictions, then why judge?)

Of course there would have to be a caveat on the Jumbo that it is not official. but at least the audience will know that out of seven judges, 4 agreed with the CoP results. They can then go home happy somewhat.

Wonder what the Worlds results would be for the Men in Sweden?

 

[Star85]

I never thought about this before. I guess the kiss and cry really isn't as dramatic as it used to be. I don't think it's critical to the sport, but extra drama is always good. Especially these days when figure skating can use more fans and ratings.

They could show the scores of each judge. I never liked how the change that came with the new judging system, to make the judges scores annonymous. Anyway, maybe that would make it more dramatic again.

 

[herios]

This article is good only for those who were clueless back then as they are now as far as figure skating intricacies. Perfect mark? For some of the judges, for others not. So what has earned Lu Chen in the same year 1996 in Edmonton her perfect 6.0's ? ...A silver medal! because later on, more judges preferred Michele Kwan and awarded her the title. Lu Chen went from ecstasy in the kiss and cry to agony in the background. This was kiss and cry all about, total fake drama.
in reality comes down to the same things as before, how many judges like you and this time around "by how much" ??? The only difference before was you figured out which judge supported you or nailed you, now you don't.

Before was a string of numbers much harder to figure out what ordinals actually are representing, now there are some totals, much easier to assess compared to the other skaters.
It's not about COP, it's about math. It is still drama for the athletes, believe me, Look at their faces when they realize they won! Did anybody see Florent Amodio's LP on youtube at the GPF? He had to hide his teary face, he was that happy !, That is kiss and cry edition 2008!!! Still the same as always

Joseph

 

[Joesitz (RIP)]

This article is good only for those who were clueless back then as they are now as far as figure skating intricacies. Perfect mark? For some of the judges, for others not. So what has earned Lu Chen in the same year 1996 in Edmonton her perfect 6.0's ? ...A silver medal! because later on, more judges preferred Michele Kwan and awarded her the title. Lu Chen went from ecstasy in the kiss and cry to agony in the background. This was kiss and cry all about, total fake drama.
in reality comes down to the same things as before, how many judges like you and this time around "by how much" ??? The only difference before was you figured out which judge supported you or nailed you, now you don't.

Before was a string of numbers much harder to figure out what ordinals actually are representing, now there are some totals, much easier to assess compared to the other skaters.
It's not about COP, it's about math. It is still drama for the athletes, believe me, Look at their faces when they realize they won! Did anybody see Florent Amodio's LP on youtube at the GPF? He had to hide his teary face, he was that happy !, That is kiss and cry edition 2008!!! Still the same as always

Joseph

good post and good name!

Along these lines of thinking, I can't imagine how they arrived at an assortment of automatic penalties - not that I think they should not exist, but how can they say that one skating fault is worse than another? All faults are equally serious and mar the overall program. n'est pas? I wonder if they show up in the PCs' Skating Skills?

 

[abaka]

Well, just to take my kick at the can once and for all...

I totally agree with the article.

Either a sport is measured, or it is judged.

Running, swimming, jumping, weightlifting are measured (swifter, higher, stronger) and the 0.01 or 0.001 margin of victory means something physical.

Figure skating is judged. The CoP is a wonderful way for robots to judge, but then robots will skate -- it seems some are saying that's already happening -- and eventually robots will watch.

A judging system should be as simple as possible. What does a hypothetical 0.01 margin really mean? Who knows?

The 6.0 was simple. CoP will never be.